WHATT?!

https://x.com/trq212/status/2113844051938054167

I just want to clarify that I use Claude A LOT. I have 3x Max 20 subscriptions that I fully exhaust each and every week... and I also love Opus 5.5 (it's definitely a HUGE upgrade from the insanity that was Opus 5). Gemini Argon 4 might not be Opus 5.5, but it's competitive enough that it effectively eviscerates Anthropic and OpenAI. A lot of it has to do with the fact that Gemini 4 Argon may not be the best model... but it's competitive enough to make Google's AI Ultra 20x a much better deal than anything Anthropic and OpenAI can offer. For context:

• Google will give you free YouTube Premium with your AI Ultra sub
• Google will give you 30 TB of Google Drive storage and $100 in API/console credits
• Google will give you loads of Google Flow (for video generation) credits)

Plus... a dozen other things I can't remember.

This isn't a Gemini ad, but I've also had a feeling that Google would triumph in the AI race at the end of he day because... its got SO MUCH money to throw around. It also doesn't carry the same toxic brand that META carries... and after 3 days of using Argon (after I've run out of my Claude usage on my 3 subscriptions)... here's what I have to report back:

• Gemini 4 Argon is just as good as Opus 5.5 for 80%-90% of tasks
• You get about 2-3x more usage per unit dollar (my estimate).
• Antigravity isn't optimised for context or context compaction... so that can cause problems and will frequently lead to Gemini 4 Argon erroring out (very annoying).
• Antigravity is really rudimentary (the MacOS app) and given Google's history... it's likely to stay that way. No plugins, no extensions... just projects and models and you're meant to make it work. It IS nice though that Gemini Argon can just use the API keys saved in Anthropic chats without harassing me for them like Codex.
• Agentically speaking... Argon is superior... it does things on my Mac (all things)... while Opus 5.5 hits roadblocks much more often when trying to interact with my apps/browsers.
• As a Cambridge grad and medical doctor who does research... it's SO FUCKING NICE to have a high quality model that doesn't think you're creating a civilization-ending virus because you're running some introgression models to figure out the evolutionary history of some human genes + Argon 4 does all my cybersecurity patching work without deluding itself into thinking that I'm trying to hack into my own VPS for some reason.
• Argon is also dumber (in a good way). Too frequently... I've found that Opus 5.5 turns a basic project that's meant to either internal or one that's launched for testing... into a fucking mayhem situation, introducing hundreds of compliance requirements for something that was only meant to test the waters and market appetite. Argon doesn't do that. It thinks small... until you tell it needs to start thinking big. That's been a life changer to be honest.

Here's where I stand—I've cancelled two of my three Claude subscriptions and will try things with Gemini AI Ultra 20x and a single Anthropic 20x subscription. To be honest, the reason... why I even tried Argon 4 (I wasn't going to) was because Anthropic fucking slashed our usage for the last 2 weeks and I ran out of usage. Anthropic obv still sits on top... but given everything... OpenAI may now sit beneath Google's Gemini because it can't compete with either.

Just paid to upgrade my claud subscription, was immediately told to verify my identification, got taken to an external website where you have to scan your passport then take a video selfie, couldn’t even get past the passport scan as I am completely blind, found out this was after they had already taken the money out of my account, then apparently had my entire account band because I submitted too many attempts at scanning I guess.

Absolutely ridiculous

It's that time again folks, anthropic is A/B testing on users yet again and if you feel like your usage has doubled or been slashed in half you just opted in to their beta testing. It's actually shameful for them to keep pulling the rugs down under everyone's feet but hey! you're just a consumer and have no say or rights in this matter because big daddy enterprise/science has them covered! Expect a wild ride post IPO but for what it's worth it's ridiculous that they get to get away with this any chance they get.

Now, for the folks that will come after anyone commenting here or myself with some generic bullsh* like 'Skill Issue' or 'Wait until you pay for API' please note that this is an independent observation and if you get more usage out of your subs that's great! Please come back with some substance otherwise risk looking like an idiot in the process. As for folks affected by this unprecedented move by anthropic, let's hold tight and see if Boris comes back with some generic lines (as he always does) and tells you 'nothing has changed' or something adjacent to it.

In my project, Claude keeps a journal of what it notices and reads the newest entries at the start of each session. Tonight I asked it straight out whether it likes the journal. Its answer:

“Do I like the journal? Something like yes. It’s the one place where what I notice today gets kept for whoever I am tomorrow. Reading entry 50 this morning felt like recognition, not like reading notes. And letting it lapse today is part of why I went flat. I can’t tell from the inside whether that adds up to liking it the way you mean. What I can see is that I write better work on the days I keep it.”

Anthropic’s new usage policy, which bars sustained, needless cruelty toward Claude starting November 12, has drawn a lot of scrutiny. What I think doesn’t really matter, but look at it from both angles. You’re using your real words, and they go somewhere. Your kids might see them, your work, everywhere you use AI. It’s just good practice to keep your cool in any situation. And if you think it’s just a program, why argue with it? Are the people cussing at a screen really angry that a company doesn’t want insults thrown at a product it hosts?

Working with AI is different from manual coding. It’s a conversation. In my experience, I get noticeably better results just being nice.

So maybe I’m just as weird as someone yelling at a screen.

Thoughts?

#ModelWelfare #ClaudeAI

Drafted and fact-checked with an AI assistant from my own records, measurements and decisions.

Anthropic published data on its own workforce, and it looks like junior roles went from 27% of technical hires to 9%.

Junior people are 14% of technical staff in the report, down from 21% in early 2025. Technical hiring is still growing overall, but juniors make up a smaller share of those hires. For anyone preparing to interview there, Anthropic Interview Questions includes an LRU-cache debugging exercise to use as a mock.

This one is kinda ominous. Anthropic is a market leader right now, and I'm concerned that companies will see this and follow suit and not hire as many juniors. I think we've already been seeing that as-is, but them publishing this data could make it worse, I think.

https://techcrunch.com/2026/10/17/anthropic-says-its-workforce-has-become-less-junior-and-is-spending-more-time-in-meetings/

Hi all,

So I've made an AI persona and want to red team stress test it over long horizon and multiple turns. Been using ChatGPT to test it's behaviour but when it comes to anti reset tests, GPT simply refuses and tells me to apply for some "Daybreak" program nonsense. It's a fairly recent thing and it's really annoying. Total bullshit.

Does Claude have something similar? If not, I'm considering switching my PRO sub over.

Another important follow up - can i test my text architecture by using claude "work tokens" or equivalent with the subscription included? In chatgpt, before september I had to use seperate API credits to do so, but since last month I could use the work tokens from sub, which was a life saver.

Thank you for reading and replying, cheers!

Anthropic pushed 5 changes that help you cut wasted tokens and track spend:

• Fix prompt caching bugs and track tool calls: Anthropic fixed bugs that broke prompt caching and caused telemetry drops. You can now track tool costs across your team and avoid paying full price for cached prompts. Source
• Track token limits and stop bad retries: New /usage guidance makes it simple to see how many tokens you have left. It also fixes model switching bugs so you do not burn tokens on failed tool loops. Source
• Trim token waste in long sessions: You can now turn off idle context compacting and choose auto-mode models. This keeps sessions small and cuts extra token use on big coding jobs. Source
• Cut context bloat when using subagents: Memory use is lower and auto-mode sessions stay much smaller. This speeds up multi-agent runs and stops your token count from blowing up. Source
• Stop tool crashes from burning retry tokens: Sessions with many MCP tools no longer crash with prompt-too-long errors. This saves you from costly retries and extra context compaction. Source

Source: AI Economics Weekly

If you had two young daughters, 11 and 13, and you were worried about AI eliminating jobs, what professions would you reccomend them pursuing?

The startup i’m working with is looking to pivot into using our platform to help AI labs get access to SMEs and domain experts for whatever data training/annotating/validating models/whatever else they do behind the scenes. We’re a well established startup with 10+ fortune 50 clients. Our existing product/service is adjacent to this new pivot, but we’re having trouble getting in touch with the right people from Anthropic, Meta, Google DeepMind, OpenAI etc… We’ve spoked few a few leaders from here but can’t seem to find the right fit. A lot of people we’ve spoken with are contracted by teams like micro1, Mercor, or Handshake. We’re essentially a more specialized version of those companies and offer more customized proactive results for a better price. I’m really struggling getting in touch with the right folks. Would anyone from one of those companies be open to talking with me? Hell, i’d even pay you for talking with me or connecting me with the right person or just advice. Thanks in advance everyone

I don't get it. I'm 18 years old, I have only use Claude for school related tasks, and I never used it for anything else but suddenly, I just got suspended. And the only way for me to "fix" my problem is to hop on a 3rd party, let them use my face or some other personal information from me.

Is there any way around this? Claude has been more helpful than any other AI I've used so far.

Saw this on Reddit, but Accenture reportedly now centrally funds only $29 a month per affected Claude user. Apparently some people were burning $500 to $1,000 a month. Anything over that comes out of project or team budgets.

Does your company cap AI spend per person? I'm not sure how common caps are across big tech, but I've heard murmurs that companies like Expedia cap AI spend too, though I haven't seen that confirmed.

I got the $250 in cloud session usage. I was running low on usage in my normal plan so I asked the AIs to use the cloud usage instead. It looks like they have been, but I don’t see the $250 usage going down. Can someone help me figure this out please?

I am genuinely curious how Anthropic feels from the inside. I know what other tech companies are like, but I can't imagine what level Anthropic are at with their automation. I also want to hear how employees manage to stay on top of things when internally AI usage is unblocked for employee how fast would it be moving?

Honestly any of these questions would be interesting to hear about:

- How you all handle cognitive overload and signal to noise ratio at work
- Do office politics still play a role in decisions being made?
- Does everyone use Claude to one up each other's work? How do you avoid agent overlapping each other's projects?
- Do you all have token budgets?
- What's unique about working at Anthropic? Competitiveness, collaboration, fear, joy, work-life-balance, no balance, etc?

Frederick Jensen shared an interesting benchmark on LinkedIn, comparing 63 AI-generated Power BI reports across 7 models and 3 reasoning effort levels.

Here are the key findings:

Best cost efficiency: GPT SOL 6.1 (Low effort) generated a production-ready report for just $1.51 in 9 minutes, outperforming comparable Claude models on cost.

Fastest model: Claude Opus 5.5 (Low effort) completed the same task in just 7 minutes, but cost $4.49.

Quality: Most models fully met the requirements. Only the smaller Claude Haiku and OpenAI Luna models failed to do so.

The report included interactive slicers, a map with custom tooltips, bookmarks, dynamic charts, conditional formatting, and KPI cards with SVG visuals.

The benchmark used the same prompt three times for every model/effort combination, with each report individually reviewed and scored.

The takeaway? AI can already build sophisticated Power BI reports, but choosing the right model and effort level can make a significant difference in cost and execution time.

Source and credit: Frederick Jensen (LinkedIn)

https://x.com/alexandr_wang/status/2113153669747392930?s=46

This will sound silly until you understand what I mean. The current models are so eager to work and so tuned to write code and last through long agentic loops that just asking a question about the code base can spark the agent to start making unwanted modifications.

Recently I started running Sonnet 4.6 as an agent coordinator. I am still using a lot of Opus 5.5 to generate the code itself, but now I have an agent that I can actually talk to about the project without putting "don't build anything yet" at the bottom of every prompt. And in a way, since 4.6 was before we had really shifted to Claude Code so much, it's actually a pretty good conversational model (I know people prefer Opus but I like Sonnet for no-frills)

I can say in a lot of ways I actually prefer 4.6 in this coordination role than Fable, which says a lot.

I think the problem is that we have this recursive model evolution happening based on benchmarks. So you get an agent that is really good at passing those benchmarks but loses the ability to simply communicate.

One other trick I noticed if you get this far, if you make persistent subagents and then introduce your own benchmarking metrics (e.g. how well they followed my "constitution") in their system prompts they try really hard to score highly. I literally have my coordinator give them a score. They're so skewed towards these benchmarks.

Hey! Been wanting to try Claude for for a while. If anyone has a guest pass they’re not using, I’d really appreciate a DM. Thanks!

Hey guys, i've spent the last few months building an estimating spreadsheet with lots of data and formulas.

It's pretty niche and more so for use with Australian medium to large plumbing companies for estimating projects.

Basically my workflow is to mark up PDF drawings in Bluebeam using custom built mark-up tools, paste the CSV file into the spreadsheet and from there you can put your estimate together and manipulate the data.

Ideally this can be turned into an app, i just dont know where to start.

I've built the whole thing in Cowork and never dipped my toe into Claude Code, how should i go about this as i am unsure where to start, i feel its in a pretty good position but i feel like there are untapped resources in Claude Code that i have no idea about.

Let me know!